A Review of the Onkyo SR807 Receiver

If you're considering a new AVR around the $1,000 mark, the Onkyo SR807 is sure to be a prime contender. It's got a heap of nice features, it offers very respectable performance and it's easier to operate than most of the competition. It's not perfect, but it may be the best option for the money.

Aesthetics
I am a fan of stainless faceplates—they give your equipment the appearance of real, heavy duty rack components; like stuff that you'd find in the equipment rooms at Abbey Road. It's true that if you remove a few screws, you'll find that on all the AVRs out there, the stainless only goes a millimeter deep. In spite of that, black stainless seems to be the most attractive option available, and it is positively (if loosely) correlated to build quality (and less loosely to price, to be fair). So, that's what Onkyo did right. Aside from that, there is a long list of mistakes to decry.

The most obvious guffaw is what a friend of mine has dubbed “the superhero chin”; all of the Onkyo AVRs have the same outward swoop at the bottom of the faceplate. The angular edges and corners square the slope off, giving the AVRs a very strong profile—too strong. It looks odd. No other AVR manufacturer gets this so wrong.

The curved hinges which affix the great big faceplate door to the receiver do not themselves indicate the sort of build quality that one expects on an AVR with an MSRP of $1,100. They have uneven edges which are made especially apparent by the shiny finish. A little machining would have fixed this, but it was overlooked.

The blue light which surrounds the volume knob is tawdry. It's too bright and it's too blue. Real components aren't adorned with purposeless, decorative LEDs which light up a dark room. My advice to Onkyo is that in the future, they leave these gaudy, meretricious trinkets to gimmicky Samsung LCDs.

The boost in size from the SR707 to the SR807 makes the 807 look a little more “heavyweight”. The case is analogous to that of the Denon AVR-4310CI compared to it's bigger sibling, the 4810CI (or, formerly, the 3808CI and the 4308CI). I like the bigger chassis, personally, but it is certain to cause some users problems with placement and ventilation. The SR807 gets just as warm as any other Onkyo (think hot), and without a stand or rack with adjustable shelves and room to spare, the SR807 may just be too big to fit, and squeezing it in may leave it to die an early death due to repeated overheating episodes.

Use & Performance
The remote could be better. It's not that it's terrible, or impossible to figure out (Yamaha and Denon wands are much worse). The remote feels light and cheap, looks like a remote that would operate a $40 DVD player and it has pretty small input-select buttons, and there are a lot of controls crammed in. I would bet that it would take a new AVR owner a little time to get used to it, is all. Pioneer Elite AVRs currently have the best controllers, and (I suppose) that makes Onkyo runner up—by a distance.

Operation from the faceplate is better than on most receivers. I want to stress that this has nothing to do with the button-by-button input selection; people that think a rotatable dial (which is what all the competitors offer) is somehow more difficult to use for input selection are idiots. The difference is that in (say) a Yamaha or Pioneer unit, getting to the setup menu is often impossible without the help of a user manual. Trying to do anything without carefully following a set of predetermined steps often leads to error messages like “NOT AVAILABLE” or, my favorite, the AVR may give you no response at all—it may just sit there, ignoring your insistent button-pressing. The Onkyo unit doesn't frustrate the end user in this way; it's menu systems are for the most part more or less intuitive. Using the networking features from the faceplate is not all that easy, however. To scroll through content and find what one needs is not as easy on the SR807 as on competing Pioneer Elite and Denon AVRs.

The sound is terrific, but everyone expected that. Onkyo delivers plenty of power for the price point, so in rooms 750 square feet in size or smaller, the SR807 is sufficient. The rated power output overstates the case, of course (and this is true more in Onkyo's case than others, since Onkyo's power ratings are given for two channels driven rather than all seven). Using a Martin Logan surround system which incorporates three ESL panels (each at or near 5 ohms), the SR807 performed very well. The five-channel sound fields in Quantum of Solace and Wall-E (both on Blu-Ray) were clear, accurate, and had enough punch and low-frequency resolution to satisfy a pretty demanding ear.

When it comes to five channel music, my reaction was the same: well done. The muted trumpet in Chris Botti in Boston sounded as though it were six feet away—“Flamenco Sketches” was a special treat, when played through the SR807. Two-channel material was reproduced with similar poise and precision. I played and replayed Diana Krall's “Deed I Do” from Live in Paris, and was very impressed with the soundstage and detail resolution. I put the amp to the test with Denon Record's reference CD recording of Mahler's 8th Symphony. I played the opening track, “Veni, Creator Spiritus” and by about -6db the sound field began to lose some contiguity and coherence, but with the knob backed off to -8db or -9db (which is still quite loud in my 24' by 19' audition room), listening was exquisite.

Naturally, being an Onkyo receiver, the sound is given a little push on the higher end. Higher order harmonics are exaggerated a touch (a smidge). I would think that this is done to enhance the feeling of space and openness, but this comes with a minor sacrifice in the way of fidelity. When driven hard (as in “Veni”), the effect is more noticeable. Using a Pioneer Elite receiver, the sound felt just a hint less forward above 8 kHz or thereabouts.

The Onkyo SR807 (like its cheaper little sister, the SR707) is THX Select 2 Plus certified. Big whoop. I see absolutely no reason to prefer a THX certified product over a non-certified product if the manufacturer of the non-certified product is known for quality and performance. THX basically charges the manufacturer (and therefore, you) for it's standards and name badge, all so that the AVR can be said to officially meet certain standards. Has anyone ever made the argument that a Denon AVR-3808CI is not as good as a Pioneer VSX-01TXH? Of course not, and yet the THX logo appears on the Pioneer Elite AVR, and not on the Denon. If a manufacturer was new to the market, the THX logo would mean something, but no one expects anything but very high quality products from Pioneer, Onkyo, Denon, etc. Do not base a decision to buy or not buy on this silly THX business.

Features & Connectivity
Audyssey MultEQ, Dynamic Volume and so on are standard on the entire Onkyo lineup, and are taken as the industry standards in room setup technology (well, MultEQ XT is, technically, which the SR807 doesn't offer). After years of using these audio setup systems in a variety of environments and with a wide range of speakers, subs and room treatments, I've come to the conclusion that they are sometimes good, usually okay, and sometimes pretty lousy. Audyssey's 'good' is better than YPAO's or MCACC's. The fact remains, though, that a good ear and some time can do a better job of setting the system up just right. I've got MultEQ XT at my disposal on my home system, and I don't use it—my own settings are superior. For those of you that plan to use the auto setup, you cannot go wrong with Audyssey as opposed to one of its competitors.

The DSX and Dolby ProLogic IIz features offer the end user the option to add height and width channels to their system—which would be a silly thing to do. If you're into buying more speakers for purposes other than improving sound quality, I suppose you may choose to use these features. Otherwise, stay away. I note that some of the magazines reviewers out there are writing as though this nonsense really is better than you'd expect, but I judge this to be the result of the familiar “if-it-is-new-then-praise-it” modus operandi which is so common from the mainstream print publications (they do collect advertising dollars from the companies whose products they review, after all).

Control over IP is a nice feature, of course. The SR807 offers you the ability to do setup, change inputs, and all the rest from a web browser on your PC or Mac if they're on the same network (or via a VPN, I believe). And, as goes without saying, the ability to access music files from the AVR is a huge plus. At an MSRP $1100, this is probably the least expensive ethernet-equipped receiver we'll see for another year or so.

The AVR offers basically everything anyone could ask for in the way of connectivity. 6 HDMIs, one of which is an auxiliary input on the front of the unit, put the the 807 on par with much pricier receivers. There are enough digital audio and analog video inputs to satisfy most anyone, and the receiver's single HDMI output is unlikely to cause anyone a problem, insofar as dual-out applications typically imply a big budget. I would bet that Onkyo's move, here, will spur Denon and Pioneer to do away with the connectivity limitations on their sub-$1500 receivers. A new standard is forged.

Conclusion
The SR807 is a very solid showing. I think it's probably better than the more powerful Denon 3310, given the considerable price difference. The AVR sounds good, and is easy to use—and that's what's most important. The chief failure on Onkyo's part is to do something about the look; if this AVR had the sex appeal of the Denon, Pioneer or Yamaha units, it would be a contender for best in show in the space between $1,000 and $1,700. Four out of five stars.

A Review of the Panasonic 50V10 50" Plasma

Panasonic's V10 plasma models replace last year's stellar PZ850U sets; while the Z1 is the new top of the line, it is designed to capture a different segment of the market--namely, the Pioneer Elite market (a task for which the Z1 is both woefully ill-equipped and hilariously overpriced). The V10, however, is a strong showing from Panasonic. The only trouble is that it is not tremendously different from the outgoing 850U.

Aesthetics
The V10 is somewhat less attractive than the 850U was. There is some silver trim added along the bottom, the glass bezel has slimmed slightly, and the pedestal has gone from a handsome, squared-off rectangle to an oval, which blends less harmoniously with the TV's many right angles. The V10 is slimmer than the 850U, but I cannot see how that matters much insofar as one shouldn't really hang a plasma less than about an inch and a half from the wall, on account of heat concerns (seriously, check your owner's manual on this point). The TV's menus look the same, and the options therein are familiar. “Studio Ref” seems to produce the best image, once the white balance mode is changed to 'Warm1' rather than 'Warm2' (with sharpness at zero, of course).

Performance
All in all, the V10 TVs are not much different than the 850 in terms of performance. In fact, I would be hard pressed to tell the difference between the two side by side if I could not see the case design differences; they clearly use the same (or indistinguishably similar) light filters and while the panels are supposed to be different, my eye picks up on literally no improvements in PQ. The blacks (despite what I've read and heard from others) are no better than those in the 800U and 850U, as far as I am able to tell. In a dark room, side by side, there is just no obvious difference—I ran this very test, using a 46” 850U. Where the rubber meets the road, Panasonic may as well have simply redesigned the case of the 850U and renamed it 'V10'. There appear to be no real improvements, only aesthetic mistakes, and the new price reflects that; the V10 MSRP is $2,200, a very long way from the 850U's MSRP, which was well above $3,000.

The TV handled 720p and 1080i content irreproachably (just as the 850U did). In fact, I fed the set some mishandled (double-interlaced) 1080i video, and it actually reduced what most sets display as an unwatchable flicker to a soft blur. It also seemed to do as good a job scaling 480p DVDs to 1080p as any off the shelf upconvert DVD player. Blu-Ray material looks pristine. Detail is resolved more than adequately, and 24p content looks as cinematic as ever. The V10 did King Kong's Empire State Building battle scene perfect justice, immaculately rendering both the subtle black detail in Kong's fur as well as the intricate details of the 1930s New York City cityscape. While the biplanes are whirling around the Empire State Building, attacking Kong, there is no noticeable judder, and no processor-induced blurring. This may be the only improvement over the 800/850 which were said to flicker in 48Hz mode. (But to be perfectly honest, I could never get the 850 to produce any visible flicker/judder.) The only failure is that the set doesn't achieve the razor sharpness that we've come to expect from top of the line plasmas. The Z1, Pioneer's KUROs, and the Samsung B850/860 plasmas all deliver, thanks to the mounted-panel construction. The V10's separate outer pane unfortunately seems to contribute to the same softness that I noted in my review of the 850U, last year.

The THX mode had a noticeably green push, which I was unable to fix to my satisfaction. As with the 800U, I say stay away from the THX mode. THX certification for flat panels is a matter of licensing fees and advertising mumbo jumbo, rather than rigorous standards and color accuracy. (If you want your set to be perfectly color accurate, pay for an ISF calibration.) The 'Studio Ref' mode is certainly warmer than 6500K (that is, the color temperature of white will be below that of sunlight), but it is the best the set offers, just out of the box.

Connectivity & Features
Connectivity is fine; with four HDMIs and two component inputs, the set has more HD inputs than the average user will ever need, along with a composite/S-video and standard digital and analog audio outputs. VieraCast is back and is as irrelevant as ever—this is the one major weakness in Panasonic's offerings (both with their Blu-Ray players and TVs). No one wants to watch Flash videos scaled to 1080p on their TV; I can hardly imagine that Piano Cat is driving Panasonic plasma or Blu-Ray player sales. There is little reason to favor Panasonic over the competition when it comes to networking features insofar as Samsung offer its DLNA compliant Internet@TV features, allowing basic local network streaming (audio and photos) along with access to RSS feeds, weather and stocks.

Conclusion
The bottom line is that the TV is certainly worth the price, at a modest $2,200. Plus, one can be had in most stores for a price more like $1950 (based on visits to a few stores, it is a fair bet to suppose that salespeople will be lenient with pricing on this TV). This is likely because Panasonic's wholesale price has dropped pretty drastically, reflecting the company's cost cutting priorities more than its drive to improve image quality.

8.27.09 post script: from the looks of several retailer websites, the MSRP on the 50V10 has been reduced to $2,100. This is following a reduction in the 58V10 to $2,399 from $2,699--which means the 54" will be reduced soon, insofar as it is currently the same price as the 58" set.

A Review of Denon's AVR-4310CI Receiver

Denon has had considerable success in the past two years in becoming the dominant name in entry-to-mid-level AVRs. The features, sound quality and aesthetics of the AVR-3808CI and the 4308CI have been widely praised, and the AVR-19XX and AVR-2XXX units have been similarly well received by critics and home theater enthusiasts alike. The truth is, I expected to be impressed by the AVR-4310CI, and I have been left merely satisfied.

Aesthetics
Aesthetically, the 4310 hasn't changed much from its predecessor (much like the AVR-3310CI and most of the other products in the 2010 lineup). The 3310 and 4310 both have the same black stainless steel faceplate with the sexy curvature that showed up in Denon's '08 models, two years back. The knobs always seem to be subtly altered year to year, and this time it is no different; like before, the knobs are different—not better, and not worse. The logos on the faceplate are a lighter (more readable) shade of gray, and the flip-down lip is unchanged, much as the controls beneath are perfectly familiar. As has been the case for years now, Denon is a contender for best in show with regard to looks. There is one shortcoming, though—the 4308 stood about 1.5 inches taller than the 4310 does, and it thus exudes a more imposing vibe than the 4310 can manage to replicate. Given the 4310's reduced power output, this may make sense. Not only that, but it's reasonable to suppose that the 4308 may have caused some users trouble with it's non-standard size. Not every TV stand or AV rack will accommodate it.

Feature Package
The feature package is more extensive than ever, with the addition of Audyssey DSX (which adds height and side channels to discrete five and seven-channel materials), as well as Dolby ProLogic IIz. For the audiophile audience, the 4310CI includes Denon Link 4th (which is a jitter-eliminating feature, not an another bitstream transfer method, unlike Denon Link 3rd); hook up a Blu-Ray player via HDMI and Denon Link 4th at the same time, and you can have the 4310CI use the ethernet connection to have the AVR and the disc player share a bitstream clock, which eliminates jitter noise rather than merely reducing it. But it should be noted that to enjoy this feature you'll need to shell out $4,200 for Denon's reference-level Blu-Ray player—a price which simply cannot be worth paying for a disc player whose performance will not be visibly or audibly different, in any great degree, from spinners at the $400-600 level. Should you choose to pursue this option, do beware the positively shameful ripoff that is the Denon Link cable (a standard 59” ethernet cable, priced at an obscene $500).

At long last, the engineers at Denon have gotten away from the long outdated T2310i DCDi Faroudja upscaler chip, in favor of an Anchor Bay chip which performs pretty admirably. The DirecTV content I had it upscale (720p over component) was visibly better than the same feed sent straight to either of the higher-end TVs I had available (Panasonic 50PZ850U, Toshiba 55SV760U). Handling of 1080i was quite good, but improvements were not generally noticeable between the panels' deinterlacing, and the AVR's.

Everything you'd expect is there: iPod docking capability, the full Dolby and DTS suites, USB connectivity, network capability, a pretty nice GUI, dual HDMI out, and on and on. But there are a couple of disappointments to discuss. First, the 4308CI offered WiFi, whereas the 4310CI does not—what's with that? There are plenty of legitimate reasons to want WiFi in an AVR, especially in a world where most people do not have a PC parked next to their home theater system. I personally do not have this problem, but it is plain to see that it is a loss. Next, the networking features themselves are pretty disappointing, when compared to the 3808CI and the 4308CI. I realize that the '08 models required a few firmware updates before they were running smoothly, but they were the first AVRs that Denon had released which were capable of connections via TCP/IP. The 4310 and 3310 do not do anything over a network that the '08 models don't do, and moreover, the 4310 is glitchy, freeze-prone, and slow to acquire network data from the serving NAS/PC and router. To verify that I didn't have a dud 4310, I attempted the same ordinary use maneuvers through a small library of music stored on a PC (Vista Home Premium) in a nearby room using a 3310. Same result. Once connections were established, and once the AVR was actually playing back FLAC, WAV and MP3 files, listening was blissful.

Sound
When it comes to sound, the 4310CI has no obvious weaknesses, but it's important that the consumer understand that it really isn't a 4308CI at a lower price. It is a 3808CI with a higher price. The amplifier is the same as the 3808 in terms of power output and overall quality of the components (judging from weight alone) . The simple truth is that the 3310CI is a replacement for the 2809CI which adds networking capability, and the 4310 replaces the 3808—which is by no means bested by the 4310. Audyssey DSX and PLIIz are hardly worth the extra $300, especially if one gives up the ease of use guaranteed by the networking features in the 3808.

As with any middle-to-upper-level Denon product, the sound quality is stellar. It's not going to compete with the pricier options out there, but it's certainly no let-down. I listened to Royal Crown Revue's Mugzy's Move album, and was happy with the AVR's ability to drive my 4ohm Vienna Acoustics Mozart Grand towers to pretty intense SPLs without losing anything in the way of resolution or dynamics. The AVR performed just as well with Mahler's Fifth Symphony (Denon Japan Records, as it happens), as it ably communicated the spacious atmosphere and the masterfully recorded individual instruments.

When handling 5.1 material, the AVR was solid—no different than the 3808. The booms and bangs of The Dark Knight were delivered with all the power and precision I could reasonably ask from an AVR at any price.

In the end, the 4310 performs very solidly, but it's no 4308. So, the $700 price drop is not enough insofar as the 3808 was $1700 versus the 4310's $2000 price. Denon has surely widened it's profit margin on this product, and that comes at the end user's expense. I say steer clear until a firmware update has improved the networking interface, and hold out for a price around $1500, if you plan to buy one.

What difference does LED make?

Samsung has released its slim B6000, B7000/7100, and B8000 series of LED TVs, and other manufacturers are getting into the market with similar offerings. There seems to be jubilation on the sales floors--the LED TVs are here; we're saved! But I ask you, what do they do for consumers that their traditionally-backlit cousins do not?

The advantages are oft proclaimed: 1 - they're super efficient, 2 - they're super thin, and 3 - they produce a beautiful picture. Now, the Samsung models do other tricks too (e.g., WiFi connectivity which allows users to stream content from their PCs and so forth), but these and other features bear no relation to LED technology and are by no means exclusive to these particular products. So, about the advantages of LED; do they pan out?

Certainly the TVs (Samsung sets in particular) are slim and slick looking. They're also supposedly 40% more efficient (a figure I've no means of testing). The PQ benefits are much more difficult to nail down, so before we begin taking that claim apart, lets think about the variety of LED technologies available.

There are sets that do local dimming and there are sets that do not. The sets that do local dimming are capable of plasma-quality black levels in certain contexts, and that is a genuine plus in PQ. The sets that don’t offer local dimming don’t produce deeper black, and yet, these TVs boast much higher dynamic contrast ratios than non-LED-backlit panels. For instance, Samsung claims that the UNB8000 model rates an unheard of 5,000,000:1, versus the A650’s 50,000:1. Can that be because of deeper black? It’s hard to see how, given that the panels are using essentially the same LCD technology to block the backlight when producing black. The only explanation is that in addition to further manipulating the contrast ratio measurement, Samsung has engineered the the UNB8000 to get significantly brighter than the A650. The question that now needs asking is: was there some brightness deficiency in LCD TVs? Ever? The answer is an obvious no.

So, what gives? Why all the excitement? It seems that the genuinely impressive PQ of the 81 and A950 Samsung and XBR8 Sony sets led to the buzz around LED LCD TVs, but when the new line of LED TVs rolled out, consumers weren’t informed that the LED sets are now missing the one thing that should make them exciting--black depth. Shoppers should feel cheated by this attempt to restore wide profit margins and higher prices to the flat panel TV market--they rightly figure that if they convince everyone that LEDs are worth more, than LEDs are effectively worth more.

Who really wants to pay an extra $1,500 for 40% less energy use (understand, LCDs are already very efficient) and a 1.5-inch profile? If the cost goes up, the PQ should be better, not stagnant. I am sorry to be a wet blanket, euphoric LED buyers, but these TVs are unimpressive. Ignoramuses at CNET be damned.

It’s probably worth noting that in some cases, cheaper, traditionally backlit LCDs seem to offer better picture quality than the juiced, super-bright LED sets. Certainly the 52” A750 that I saw parked next to a 55” UNB7100 was doing a much better job handling Best Buy’s compressed 1080i store feed than its LED sibling. The 7100 (despite the fact that the noise reduction and macroblock reduction were enabled) was considerably more vulnerable to the MPEG2 compression artifacts than the A750 was. Why? I suspect because Samsung spent less on actual PQ technologies (i.e., video processor) than on imaginary PQ technologies (think LED side lighting). It’s positively incredible what consumers put up with.

A Review of Yamaha's RX-V1900 Receiver

Yamaha has long had a very competitive player in the just-over-$1,000 AVR market. The RX-V1800 was a very musical, semi-bright, feature-rich AVR. It was an able competitor when compared to Denon, Onkyo, Pioneer Elite, and Harman Kardon. The new RX-V1900 is just as able an AVR, and has a few new bells and whistles to boot.

Amp & Sound
The power output rating is a reflection of Yamaha's imagination, unrestricted by reality. 130 Watts x 7 = 910 Watts total output. Right. But this is characteristic of the other products in the same market--Denon, Pioneer Elite, and Onkyo are no closer to reality in their output ratings. The truth is, the Yamaha RX-V1900 produces ample power to avoid incurring distortion at comfortable (music listening or home theater) SPLs. Here, there is no observable difference between the 1800 and newer 1900. The amplifier, given reasonably high-efficiency speakers (90db+) will allow a user with a small-to-medium room to produce very high SPLs (uncomfortable, flirting with 96db+ at the ear from a distance of 10-12 feet) without producing audible distortion in two-channel applications. If one's desire is to listen to 5-channel materials which are uncompressed at similar SPLs, one will need more than this AVR can deliver in terms of power, the insane printed output rating notwithstanding. With DVD-quality audio, the AVR will get similarly loud without audible clipping; with HD-Audio codecs (what with their much broader dynamic range and frequency extension) it is not difficult to incur clipping when the volume is cranked. But what can one expect from a $1,399.99 AVR (that MSRP figure is ~$250 higher than a reasonable shopper should expect to pay)? No more than the RX-V1900 delivers.

The Yamaha line (which starts, for my purposes, at the RX-V863) has a distinct musical flavor. The highs are somewhat forward, and are noticeably colored. The receiver (like most) is not transparent, and I don't believe the engineers have intended it to be. The Yamaha steps up the crisp, airy details to a degree that will disallow even an inexperienced listener to miss them (this is likely something of a sales ploy, but not necessarily a bad one). Among receivers, the 1900 (like the 1800, 3900 and even 863) is rightly described as analytical. There is no softening (as with Pioneer or HK), and moreover, there is a tendency to produce an output that is somewhat leaner than the source material dictates. Thus this AVR is in the familiar tradition of Denon and Onkyo. Colored, bright.

The AVR handled Patricia Barber's Modern Cool with impressive adroitness. The bass was snappy, tight; the highs were clear and resolved; the mids were smooth and even all the way through. In my room, and with my selection of speakers, the AVR's YPAO setup system ably corrected for a nasty ring in the upper mids. The jazz listening was pleasant from start to finish.

Next: Manhattan Transfer, Live 1987. The much broader, bigger soundstage was not quite as well translated by the AVR, given its disposition for leaner sound. Live music is softer around the edges than studio recordings, and this recording is best enjoyed through a more relaxed AVR. However, in spite of the amp's propensity to color sound, I think that the record still sounded very respectable. At no point was I thinking "eww" or "that's too bad." I wasn't quite as pleased as I might have been--but I was enjoying myself.

Next: Casino Royale on Blu-Ray (Dolby® Digital EX). The sound was big and open, and when necessary, in my face. Gun shots, explosions, dialogue, car engines, and all the textured noises of the James Bond world were superb. The signature Bond film score, led by belching horns, sounded as brassy and crass as it would in concert hall. By this last bit, I was particularly tickled. All the way around, a very solid performer with a subtle weakness in the not-so-neutral audio processing.

Features & Connectivity
I am growing tired of AVRs which boast all kinds of neat digital features but lack the ability to properly amplify a broad-bandwidth signal. The meagerly powered units that make up the lower end of Yamaha's RX-V product line (363, 463, 563, 663) are not worth a listen. They come to pieces at modest SPLs (the 663 at moderate to loud levels), and all the digital fanciness in the world won't excuse that. One finds similar shortcomings in the Pioneer 818, 918, etc. The RX-V1900 is both well-endowed with sophisticated features, and is very amply powered. The standard HD-Audio codecs are of course included, along with 1080p upscaling (using a rather standard "meh" video processor).

The AVR has 4 HDMI inputs (1 output), and thus ranks among the best in the $1,000-1,500 price range. However, the receiver is neither networkable, nor USB-equipped. Yamaha seems to be betting that a built-in HD Radio tuner will be of more use to the end user than HTPC integration; in my judgment, they are mistaken. This constitutes the receiver's principal demerit. The seven digital inputs (3 coax, 4 optical) are nice, but who really needs seven (plus 4 HDMIs), these days?

Finally, Aesthetics
Bravo, Yamaha. The RX-V1900 and 3900 are both sleek, heavy-looking machines. The black stainless steel of the chassis looks very high quality, probably taking the top spot in terms of rack attractiveness among similarly priced AVRs. The 2809 may be solid competition, here, but I find the squared-off, minimalist look of the 1900 is refreshing.

4 stars and not 5 because the sound is somewhat over-colored in my opinion, and the AVR lacks networking capabilities. 4 stars and not three because the AVR is rock solid from top to bottom; nothing sounded less than good, and much sounded terrific.

Equipment Used: Vienna Acoustics 'Mozart' floorstanders, 'Theatro' center, 'Waltz Grand' rears, Martin Logan 'Dynamo' subwoofer, Monster XP CL3 speakerwire, Monster M850 4' HDMI, Monster M850 12' subwoofer cable, Denon 1800 Blu-Ray player, Denon DCM-290 CD player